As I'm sure many of you are aware, many users from Reddit are now shuffling around to find a better website. This is primarily caused by a lack of transparency coupled with inconsistency on the part of Reddit; at least it is for me.

I am trying numerous sites so that I can recommend them. However, I cannot recommend Snapzu when there is a significant lack of coherence and transparency in what would be considered rule-breaking.

First off, there seems to be no explicit rules laid out. The "Etiquette on posting & commenting" section in the prologue implicitly talks about each point as if they were rules. If we assume they are rules, then some of them are worrying/hypocritical on part of Snapzu.

"7. Don't troll. If you troll, you will have a bad time."

The 'rule' above me is ridiculous, and shows a willing precedent for subjectivity on the topic of rule-breaking. How does one even define 'trolling'? I have seen many occasions where someone with a differing opinion to the crowd is labelled a 'troll'. (Some) people are weary about incoherency and inconsistency in rule enforcing, as it allows for the admins to manifest their personal biases within the site.

"8. Don't post racism or hate speech."

Again, a distinct lack of definition under what constitutes either of those things. Are anti-immigration policies racist? Would any demeaning vernacular addressed to a crowd be considered hate speech? Both words 'racist' and 'hate speech' have lost most of their meaning over the last 10 years, and can be considered many things.

Lastly, hypocrisy. I received this excerpt in an email from Snapzu- "Due to recent events at reddit regarding censorship, we are processing new invite requests more frequently to meet with unexpected demand."

Snapzu, don't imply that you are a proponent of non-censorship. If you want to heavily moderate boards and topics, that's obviously fine; just don't purport to be anything but. Either way, I would appreciate clarification on this two rules.